ID TechX free webinar 2019-01-10

While most of us won’t gain any new information, it’s important to show interest for awes. So please share the event!

Who is this for? Pricing?

Looks pretty general.

It’s a free.
Proabably just one giant ad for the IDTechEx report.

They are just bystanders who prepare high-priced reports on various tech topics, targeting wealthy investors. They try to be relevant, but what do they really have to offer?
From what I’ve seen, their information is outdated, secondhand, reflecting a peripheral, outsider viewpoint. They can only analyze according to the information available, which consists of mostly public-relations-oriented websites of various efforts, naturally highly-biased and overly-optimistic, usually not realistic. The promoter, Dr. Peter Harrop, asked me a while back which AWE team I favored. “None of them” was my response.

1 Like

Thank you for your opinion. You might be right.

Since I’m going to do a website on AWES (the stagnant http://awesystems.info) which will explain and promote the concept as well, I’m interested in how they are doing it.

One assumes they are knowledgeable on the subject or are able to analyze the systems from first principles. There are not many customers for the reports they are doing, so they have to prize them accordingly. To be able to see if they could potentially do a good analysis, you’d need to know who are doing the analysis.

It’s difficult for someone like me to gauge whether this report is accurate or not, as I am not willing to pay for reading it (and secondary probably can’t afford to spend time on it).

The good thing about it, it that it might attract potential investors to AWE. At least I think the chance of attraction is bigger than people being scared away. But that really depends on the contents of the report.

Or to know who are doing the analysis, you’d need to be able to see if they do a good analysis.

I’ll be attending the europe one. Anyone else? Can spare those 40 minutes.
If it really is a webinar and not just a webcast and thus one can interact:
Anything you want me to ask? (For example to better judge how legit their report is.)

Seen their previous report or parts of it. All they can do is repeat what they dig up on the web and make uninformed predictions. I think they were predicting big commercial deployments this year, so hold your breath. Obviously they are just repeating website hype. And if the companies themselves can’t tell you what they will do, how could a compete outsider? If you have something to build and run, do it. This kind of junk is just more of the stagnation echo-chamber of the last ten years. Blah blah blah;blah blah. Oooh look! Someone who doesn;t know as much as we do wrote a report! Let;s pretend paying attention to it is solving AWE! No you wouldn’t have time to pay any attention to it if you were really doing AWE. It’s just more gossip.

1 Like

In a previous report (https://www.researchtrades.com/report/global-airborne-wind-energy-equipment-sales-market-report-2017/1312450) I was designed as a top manufacturer/player. In reality AWE is for me only a hobby. I manufactored nothing and as player I tested and analysed enough various methods to know why there was not yet market reality (for example crosswind AWES like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rLbvSATEbg have two problems: irregular power (+ recovery for yoyo systems) due to the window of flight, and land/space use preventing secondary use due to fast move of highly tightened tethers. As seen on previous topics Y architecture (mentioned by @tallakt) could solve both…).
These reports are compilations of informations from various sources.
Marketing small devices like KiweeOne will make far more for AWE diffusion than discussions about reports.

1 Like

Not disagreeing with your overall point, but the quality of a report by a totally different group says nothing about the quality of this one. You can guess from reading the summary of that one that it is going to be rubbish.

1 Like

Really? It is a previous report from the same group!

The one you linked is from an Indian outfit, where I couldn’t find who wrote it in 30 seconds of searching? The one from this topic is written by Peter Harrop.

The report is by QYResearch, based in China. Based on that alone I would be skeptical.

Edit: it is only published by them. That matters less for the quality of the report than if they wrote it. I’m not familiar with the subject area, but it doesn’t seem too much of a recommendation to be published by them:

The current Harrop’s AWE report is “Airborne Wind Energy 2019-2039” on https://www.idtechex.com/research/reports/airborne-wind-energy-2019-2039-000632.asp.

Below there is the page of previous Harrop’s reports, of which 2017, without taking account of numerous variants: https://www.idtechex.com/search/?query=airborne+wind+energy. But only the current 2019-2039 report is available on his website.

For information the current 2019-2039 report mentions: “3.18.Superturbine ™ USA and Pierre Benhaïem France”: I thought that both were connected but they probably didn’t.

@Windy_Skies your misleading (“You can guess from reading the summary of that one that it is going to be rubbish”) comes from your prejudice “To be able to see if they could potentially do a good analysis, you’d need to know who are doing the analysis.” As you think it is Harrop’s analysis you think it is good. As you want think it is not Harrop’s analysis you think it is “rubbish”. But both are Harrop’s analyses. By reading more carefully you would have been able to see that the structure is the same for all reports (please see the table of contents of each report), showing there are updated reports on the same basis, instead of stopping on some “Indian outfit”. On the link I just provided you can see “ID: 1312450” (top left) showing it is a report from IDTechEX, so from Peter Harrop, as he confirmed it to me. You can see a similar summary on https://www.marketresearchstore.com/report/global-airborne-wind-energy-equipment-market-research-report-340261 and on other websites. All come from IDTechEX.

1 Like

Good rebuttal.

I don’t know the guy. And I didn’t say I thought this report was probably good, I agreed with you that it might not be. I meant, to be able to do a good first principles analysis based on physics, you’d need to be a physicist or similar. To be able to do a good market analysis, you’d need to know about market analysis, and so on. If you are not those things, an outsider can from that alone make a judgement on the probable quality of your analysis. If you are not one of those things, it places a probable upper bound on the quality of your analysis.

What market? There is no AWE market in electricity production, excepted @Kitewinder’s market.

Some players are going for off-grid electricity. So that market for example. A good market analysis, and competitor analysis, will show you the strengths and weaknesses of various solutions, and pros and cons of going after different markets. That then gives you an idea what you are competing with and if you can compete.

I disagree doubly:

  • I don’t wrote or thought that “it might not be”. I indicated it is a compilation, without providing any positive or negative opinion about the whole.
  • Your statement here contradicts your statement of departure about IDTechEX: “While most of us won’t gain any new information, it’s important to show interest for awes. So please share the event!”.
    If now you think this report is perhaps good, perhaps not good, I wonder why your annonce should be an “event” to “share”.